McCain, a senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the Navy's poor planning had led to a new class of ships that could not survive in combat, cost far more than expected, provided less capability than earlier warships and had not demonstrated their utility after 13 years of development.A longtime critic of the program, McCain used a speech on the Senate floor to back Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's decision to limit LCS procurement to 32 ships instead of the 52 ships initially planned and called for a further cut to 24 ships.

These things don't work! So instead of building none of them, lets still go ahead and throw 24 of them together.

grumpfuff:FLMountainMan: James!: Maybe pay us back for all those planes you crashed first.

This is the stupidest thing I've read on Fark all week. Here's hoping it last the six remaining hours of my workday.

So, you haven't been on Fark much this week?

No, been pretty busy, much to the relief of Fark, I'm sure.

DROxINxTHExWIND:McCain, a senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the Navy's poor planning had led to a new class of ships that could not survive in combat, cost far more than expected, provided less capability than earlier warships and had not demonstrated their utility after 13 years of development.A longtime critic of the program, McCain used a speech on the Senate floor to back Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's decision to limit LCS procurement to 32 ships instead of the 52 ships initially planned and called for a further cut to 24 ships.

These things don't work! So instead of building none of them, lets still go ahead and throw 24 of them together.

The insanity of defense contract spending. McCain and Hagel are making lemons out of lemonade.

No matter what you actually think of McCain, he's right on this one. The LCS program is an utter boondoogle- they tried to make a multi-role, inexpensive shallow water combat ship and ended up with a weak, vulnerable and expensive debacle. Originally they were supposed to change mission by swapping out modules in a few hours which would really help flexibility. The time's in months now, and the Navy doesn't expect to change the modules basically ever.

Of course, since there are multiple builders and thousands of contractors it's going to keep going forward even if the ships themselves are garbage.

McCain is absolutely correct. It's immoral, IMHO, to send a ship to combat in the littorals (close to shore) that can't sustain damage from asymetric warfare and still fight. It's configuration is different on each ship so far. And they're going to build more than 25 of these units. It lacks firepower and is currently ill-equipped to take over for one of the roles it is supposed to take on - mine counter measures (and those ships need to be retired as well). Unless these areas are fixed, we'll be spending a significant portion (10% or more) of the USN budget trying to get these units working properly. It was a poor concept then - it's a poor concept now. Building these units so that ONLY the building yards could maintain them was a HUGE mistake - cheap to build, expensive to maintain.

I'm not usually into military-hardware porn, but I reckon that the Independence is a farking cool boat.You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.

Bad_Seed:You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.

I don't see how a ship that large can ever be "stealthy". All you need is a few cheap recon drones to defeat that stealth, not to mention the least of our worries are enemy fleets with radar trying to track our ships (this isn't WWII FFS).

The ships themselves are fine. The problem is, the Navy asked for the LCS, gave the contractors the design requirements, the contractors built to design specs, the Navy accepted the designs, the first ships were built, and then the Navy said "hey, these won't replace the frigates. We wanted to replace frigates with these."

Bad_Seed:I'm not usually into military-hardware porn, but I reckon that the Independence is a farking cool boat.[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x427]You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.

Bad_Seed:I'm not usually into military-hardware porn, but I reckon that the Independence is a farking cool boat.[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x427]You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.

/shame about all the cost overruns

it's useless though. You can usually tell when something's main purpose is "anti terrorist operations" that the military is just trying to find a justification for its existence.

Frank N Stein:it's useless though. You can usually tell when something's main purpose is "anti terrorist operations" that the military is just trying to find a justification for its existence.

Yeah, because it's not like there are any terrorists about. Or pirates, or drug-smugglers, or any other multitude of small or non-state actors who could be countered by a boat like this. I'd look at it the other way, the Navy (and guys like McCain) think they want all aircraft carriers and other impressive Big Ships to fight big classical naval battles that haven't happened since WWII. They don't want to think about all the small missions against a unglamorous opponents with improvised gear and tactics.

Chagrin:I don't see how a ship that large can ever be "stealthy". All you need is a few cheap recon drones to defeat that stealth, not to mention the least of our worries are enemy fleets with radar trying to track our ships (this isn't WWII FFS).

You don't understand stealth. Its not about being invisible, it's about reducing the radius a given sensor can detect an object.

If Radar X can detect a OH Perry class frigate at 300 km, and Radar X can detect a Freedom class LCS at 150 km, then the Freedom class is stealthy compared to a frigate

As a Marine Budget Officer (the hardest of the hard, I know), all I can say is bravo, sir. Keep it up. There are way too many pet projects that need to be killed, and we also need to start telling our commissioned officers to chip in a few bucks a month for our ridiculous health care plans.

Bad_Seed:Frank N Stein: it's useless though. You can usually tell when something's main purpose is "anti terrorist operations" that the military is just trying to find a justification for its existence.

Yeah, because it's not like there are any terrorists about. Or pirates, or drug-smugglers, or any other multitude of small or non-state actors who could be countered by a boat like this. I'd look at it the other way, the Navy (and guys like McCain) think they want all aircraft carriers and other impressive Big Ships to fight big classical naval battles that haven't happened since WWII. They don't want to think about all the small missions against a unglamorous opponents with improvised gear and tactics.

daveUSMC:As a Marine Budget Officer (the hardest of the hard, I know), all I can say is bravo, sir. Keep it up. There are way too many pet projects that need to be killed, and we also need to start telling our commissioned officers to chip in a few bucks a month for our ridiculous health care plans.

And you need to stop approving frivolous spending at the end of the fiscal year because of a fear of getting your unit's budget cut

Bad_Seed:I'm not usually into military-hardware porn, but I reckon that the Independence is a farking cool boat.[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x427]You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.

Bad_Seed:Frank N Stein: it's useless though. You can usually tell when something's main purpose is "anti terrorist operations" that the military is just trying to find a justification for its existence.

Yeah, because it's not like there are any terrorists about. Or pirates, or drug-smugglers, or any other multitude of small or non-state actors who could be countered by a boat like this. I'd look at it the other way, the Navy (and guys like McCain) think they want all aircraft carriers and other impressive Big Ships to fight big classical naval battles that haven't happened since WWII. They don't want to think about all the small missions against a unglamorous opponents with improvised gear and tactics.

Fubar:The ships themselves are fine. The problem is, the Navy asked for the LCS, gave the contractors the design requirements, the contractors built to design specs, the Navy accepted the designs, the first ships were built, and then the Navy said "hey, these won't replace the frigates. We wanted to replace frigates with these."

Glockenspiel Hero:No matter what you actually think of McCain, he's right on this one. The LCS program is an utter boondoogle- they tried to make a multi-role, inexpensive shallow water combat ship and ended up with a weak, vulnerable and expensive debacle.

And to be fair to the left, the Obama administration agrees with him (which should eliminate some of the knee-jerk McCain bashing). I suspect the only people supporting the ship are the profligate hawks on the right and whatever Democrats whose home districts help build this thing.